1. What ships classes will there be in:
Battleships/Battlecruisers, Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers Light/Cruisers Heavy and Destroyers.

2. Maneuvering will be very important, because active maneuvering will help you to dodge incoming shells, like in real life. Of course I mean shells, that were fired from long distances - 20km and more.

3. We will start with WoT-like "capture the base" mode, with one or two bases. There of course will be more game modes at start, but I can't say anything about them yet.

4. Alpha testing of World of Warships will not begin this year. Expect Spring or even Summer 2013.

5. We will use our own matchmaker system, with some limits in quantity of some ship classes per battle.

6. For customization of ship's armament: we will use a preset system, which can be described as a whole bunch of weapons, FCS, etc, that can be researched and installed at once.
There of course will be some player-manually-selectable parts of ship configuration, but the main ship's fighting capabilities will depend on what preset is bought and installed.

7. There won't be upgradeable main caliber guns for Yamato and possibly for Montana and Iowa class BBs.
The reason is that these guns are good and more than enough to sink anything.

8. Players will be able to research and upgrade planes on their CVs; the mechanism will be similiar to research and upgrades of guns/turrets for tanks in WoT.

9. There will most possibly be a limit to at least one type of each plane type squadron on a CV, so that players cannot use fighters only or bombers only CVs.

10. No preliminary tech trees now, sorry. All I can tell, that I'm the person who is actually making the trees with the help of historical consultants, of course :)

11. CAs/CLs/DDs will be able to use torpedoes, of course. The question whether BBs and BCs will be able to use torpedoes is still open among our dev team.

12. Bismarck/Tirpiz class post-Washington BBs will of course be a part of HSF/KM BB tree.

13. About naval strategies, blueprints and so on - I'll make posts on this topics, of course.

Sorry for British tech tree, but Britain wasn't the lead shipbuilding country in 1940s. Relax though, because UK will most probably be the third nation to appear in game, a couple of months after release of the World of Warships.

interresting for sure, but could u please edit the post to list what all abreviations mean? i know only some, and then a question like "12. Bismarck/Tirpiz class post-Washington BBs will of course be a part of HSF/KM BB tree." is like explaing nuclear fission to me

Maybe you should have said America and Japan were the first in game nations as they had the largest battleships in WWII then, rather than saying or at least inferring that the Japanese Imperial Navy was larger than the Royal Navy in total size by saying "biggest navies" when you meant 'biggest ships'.

Hey mate, ive already stated a huge interest in your World of Warships project. This comes because in the past i used to be a balancer for Navyfield-Europe. Yet because the mentioned game is dead, id apprechiate to see a modern and graphically perfected game in this game-branch. (Especially including the Ships of WW1, my personal favourite)

some questions im really curious about:

How will the controlsetting be? - Are you going to manueer your ship with the mouse by pinging locations to drive to - or are you going to use wasd-keys to acieve meovement?

Especially: How will the guncontrol be? -Are you going to swich modes like arty in WoT-do you use wasd-keys slightly as one well known navy-mmo so far (my favourite) ;)-are you using your mouse from distance (id consider that being worst)

Which is why the satellite view is needed. This isnt a total hardcore navy sim this is just an arcade for everyone to play. If theres no satellite view then how else are you going to hit those out of screen targets? Please provide a better solution if you dont like the current one. And IDK if this fits here but if it aint broken, dont fix it.

Then what youre saying is getting rid of SPGs completely. Or rather just use them as TD's, completely removing another good feature of the game. Again I quote myself this isnt a hardcore sim this is just an arcade game for everyone to play.

On a side note youre also making scouts less useful. Sure they spot enemy positions but thats just about it. Nothing else. Oh wow what a boring game that is. Just point and shoot point and shoot. Might aswell just play Minecraft for the same kind of gameplay.

If SPGs cant use satellite view then theres no use in SPGs at all. Theyre TDs so to say. So if youre not assuming they should be removed then do tell a better way of handling this "issue" of yours. Blaming people is just an excuse of you running out of arguments.

As for the ships, if you dont like it, dont play it. Easy no? Stop complaining and leave the devs alone.

British tanks may be in WOT however they are poor beyond belief, not even close to what they are irl, not to mention the FV215b that they have as tank but was actually a tank destroyer, WG the company that likes to make stuff up and claim it's "historically correct" hysterically incorrect would be more accurate.

Thank you for answering my question KGB. A preset system for the armament makes good sense. I know most people are excited about the BBs and CVs but I'm personally looking forward to the cruisers. Although I'm interested in hearing how the Alaska class cruisers will be handled. Will it be included in the BB line or possibly be a cross over from the cruiser line? I had thought it might make an interesting end tier for the cruisers.

If you state your timeframe to be from 1905 - 1950 then not having the Royal Navy in becomes even more of a travesty. If you wish to include Japan to capture the Asian market by all means do so, as it may well be a commercially justifiable decision. However please do not use an apparently false reason because by that logic Germany should not have been a starting nation in World of Tanks because they never managed to properly build any Tier IX or X tanks (Maus prototype hardly counts).

Question about WoWs: one of the initial things that struck me as very odd is that there is no possibility to actually name your own ship (unless that changed) - why is that? I believe that names of the ships play much bigger role in history than the names of the planes or tanks.

I understand the concerns about ships named "USS 18adolfhitler18" or some other idiotic names, but for example Star Trek Online has exactly this option and during the few months I spent playing it (casually tho), I have never seen a ship with a really retarded name. Besides, there wouldnt really HAVE to be a decal with the name, if that's too complex...

Fair enough, that makes sense. I just wonder if it would be possible to allow ALL the American names for ALL the American ships (and Japanese for the Japanese ships of coure) available, that would actually make the customisation much broader without too much realism issues, no?

"There will most possibly be a limit to at least one type of each plane type squadron on a CV, so that players cannot use fighters only or bombers only CVs."

I've seen this handled before in mods for Hearts of Iron. There is a base unit called a CAG, which has a very small number of major upgrades to its basic stats. There are then any number of much smaller modifiers that can be added to the CAG's values by researching specific things - be they drop tanks, or particular aircraft. It would actually be an interesting design choice to make the CAG a major research tree in and of itself. It would be a similar balancing item to WoT's SPG tree requiring XP as if it's two tiers higher. Instead of higher XP for the carrier line, you'd need to upgrade both your carrier and your CAG tree.

1. And what with more specialized ships? Escort destroyers, Anti Aircraft cruisers, frigates?2. What about mines? Are you planning implement mines and mine laying ships?3. What nations are planned? Obvius are US, Germany, Japan, UK. I think France and Italy are a must. Besides any more? Australia? Netherlands? Maybe EU tree? Or South American tree?

gw2 gold Life is too short to wake up in the morning with regrets. So, love the people who treat you right and forget about the ones who do not gw2 gold, people who are serious about the relation are moody as they have devoted a lot that makes them worry about gains and losses guild wars 2 gold.

One meets its destiny on the road he takes to avoid it Cheap C9 Gold, If I could rearrange the alphabet, I'd put Y and I together c9 gold, People who are serious about the relation are moody as they have devoted a lot that makes them worry about gains and losses c9 online gold.

All the articles you talked about inside post are extremely good and is very helpful. Let me maintain it in mind, thanks for expressing the information retain updating, excited to get more articles.лучший планшет